Another example of anti-tobacco misinformation is the landmark 1993 report in which the Environmental Protection Agency declared that
environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is a dangerous carcinogen that kills three thousand Americans yearly. Five years later, in July
1998, federal judge William L. Osteen lambasted the EPA for "cherry picking" the data, excluding studies that "demonstrated no association
between ETS and cancer," and withholding "significant portions of its findings and reasoning in striving to confirm its a priori hypothesis."
Both "the record and EPA's explanation," concluded the court, "make it clear that using standard methodology, EPA could not produce
statistically significant results." A more damning assessment is difficult to imagine, but here are the court's conclusions at greater
length, in its own words.
EPA publicly committed to a conclusion before research had begun; excluded industry [input thereby]
violating the [Radon Research] Act's procedural requirements; adjusted established procedure and scientific norms to validate the
Agency's public conclusion, and aggressively utilized the Act's authority to disseminate findings to establish a de facto regulatory
scheme intended to restrict Plaintiff's products and to influence public opinion. In conducting the ETS Risk Assessment, EPA disregarded
information and made findings on selective information; did not disseminate significant epidemiologic information; deviated from its
Risk Assessment Guidelines; failed to disclose important findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers. EPA's
conduct left substantial holes in the administrative record. While so doing, EPA produced limited evidence, then claimed the weight
of the Agency's research evidence demonstrated ETS causes Cancer. [Flue-Cured Tobacco Coop. Stabilization Corp. v. United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 4 F. Supp. 2d 435, 465-66 (M.D.N.C. 1998)]